PUNISHMENT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2250, 15 April 1897, Page 43

PUNISHMENT.

"Yes, the boy will grow up a thorough young* rascal ; I doubt if he bas ever had a good thrasbing in his life." "So I hear. Tarn sure he richly deserves one, if hi a behaviour here is a fair sample. A more spoilt brat I never sa.v." " My fingers just itch to give him a thorough spanking many a time, but Mary is quite persuaded that all corporal punishments arc brutal and coarse. She says that ' the modern system of appealing to the reason as an educative moral influence is far superior.' " •'Well, it sounds a very floe phrase, my dear, and I daresay you are proud of having such a. cultured, up-to-date daughter, but " " 'Educative moral influence' docs not tnrn out such obedient children as the old-fashioned •spare the rod and spoil the child' of our young Jays ! You are quite right, but Mary must take her ov?n way." — Thb Two Old Ladies. . •• Come on, come ou this minnit ! yer naughty, bad boy. I see & black inau round the corner there ; if yec don't hurry up I'll tell 'im to run away with yer." — The Nuesemaid. "Oh, all right, miss! wail, till I get yer 'ome. I'll comb yer 'air tor you,. see if I don't ! " — The .Angry Mother. There is perhaps no minor fcubjecr. upon which personal opinion differs ao wictely as on punishment. Nor do we agree to p'iiler. On the contrary, everyone is faliy convinced not only that their own opinion is the only right one, bat that it behoves then) go make ' as many converts to it as possioJs. Speaking generally, tbi» is rather ?. time of reaction in regard to punishments and tha disospiine which' ordains them — a re^cUon crom the 'igorcus dieciplice and stern ptmisuinents of the two preocdi&g generation?. " Spare Ihe rod and spoil the child " was a maxim whose «zc»:llonce no one questioned 50 or 100 years ago, but the pendulum has swung back well nigh to tha opposite limit, and we have too little punishment. It is. a part of ths sslf-indnlganc, undisciplined bringing-up which bids tifr to i\.b the rising generation of that nelfdenial and reverence without which no char&';tar cau he said to be truly noble. There is a distinct tendency on the part of parents so wad ays to shirk punishment of all kinds, and to iely entirely on moral evasion and appeals to the reasoning powera of their children. They go a step farther, as is only natural, • And, since ihey bhrink from administering punishment themselves, resent ita being in- . iiicted by the teachers who train thsir children either in public or private schools. Is not this over-seasitivoness to punishment a mistake ? Surely there are years in a child's life — before he bsuomes duly araon- | able to reason — when a certain amount of punishment is necessary for him and good for him. It in the method in which the punishment is administered which readers it either educative or abortive. There are so many "don'ts" to impress upon those who atandin that most responsible position of admmisierieg punishment, whether they do it in the capacity of parents or teachers. Let m look at tbe most important clauses of the " don'ta, 1 ' for they arc the signal poses that mark out the course of "do." Don't threatan punishment unless you are thoroughly determined to administer it. Don't punish while you are in a passion ; wait until you have had time to get cool and can show the culprit that it is his offence which moves you, not your own temper. •Don't; punish unjustly. Don't punish frequently. Don't punish to gratify your own disappointment or wrath. Remember the punishment i 3 to discipline the child, and not to afford an outlet for your own anger. I never believe in mental punishments for children. These are the punishments which liEe will mete out to them in the years to come, in the sad years and the long when they will learn that if they sin " the wages i of sin is deafch." Punishments for children should be short, sharp, and simple. Fortunately we all know how dangerous the old-fashioned " box on the ears " is. We all understand that promiscuous slaps on the face and thumps on the back are rightly relegated to oblivion as being both mischievous and injudicious. What can do more harm to the child's moral nature than these angry shakes and slaps which betray the hasty, ungoverned temper of the parent 1 In order that punishment should be effectual, however, it must be sufficiently severe to make an impression. If, on the other band, it is sufficiently severe to be cruel, all possible good is neutralised by the passicnate sense of injustice and the tyranny of the strong over the weak. A threatened punishment should never be held over till " to-morrow." The reason is simple enough. A child should never go to sleep at night unforgiven. The burden of faults committed and still xmezpiated, or the dull

smouldering fires of resentment, nnqaenched by wise counsel and forgiveness, flhonld never under any oircumstanoes fill a child's last thoughts at night. If be is of a aensitive and affectionate disposition, you lay upon him a burden which is cruel. If*»he is impetuous and high-spirited, yon harden bis nobler impulses by the tmdne strain thus imposed upon them, and rapidly bring about that " don't care " mental attitude which all too aoon will render him indifferent to your forgiveness, insensible to your anger. In a talk we had some weeks ago upon " Forgiveness " we dwelt upon the power and place that forgiveness should have in & child's life. Still I cannot help again expressing my conviction that full and free forgiveness following just punishment for wilful disobedience of " reasonable discipline " is the proper regimen for childish faults. In the case of young people who have reached an age At which corporeal punishment would be an indignity or an absurdity, we yet are conscious of a stirring of the old mosaic law within vs — " An eye for an «ye and a tooth for a tooth." Not in this spirit, however, cither now or at any time, should punishments be regarded. Nevertheless, if young people who have outgrown childish punishments are not amenable to love or to reason, what is to be done ? ' Well, in the first place, there must have been faults in the earlier training .to. induce such a state of things; but let us consider how the position may be met. They have transgressed the rules of the home iv some way ; they must be punished in some way : the question is, how ? The deprivation of some coveted pleasure, the stopping of an allowance, the curtaili ment of certain privileges, the loss of certaix freedom, shall theße punishments be chosen '1 or shall we rely on a "scolding," a bitter reprimand, or the cold displeasure of averted j look«, silence, and ioy remoteness ? I For my part I heartily distrust and condemn the latter alternatives, preferring any of the former methods. All punishment should be just, frank, and open. Speak fully and firmly to the culprit — " have it out," as boys say — as soon as you have considered the matter calmly yourself and can speak quietly and coolly. Never let your displeasure take the form of that oold silence which in your child you would call " sulks.' The whole -household is sffeofcad by it; you render everyone else so impatient and mieeiable ' that if you pose as a martyr you may be quite sure the culprit feels almost v, heroine 1 Never recur to a fault that has been pnnishod and forgiven, for by doing so you deteriorate from the quality of your "forgiveness, and wear out thn capacity fcr peniteuce. Never scold before other people, for thafe adds a sting of humiliation which forgivaucss even does not wholly heal.